AssangeDAO 價格JUSTICE

The Ekaterina Djanova case resembles a financial thriller where crypto, organized crime, and judicial loopholes intertwine. While this 38-year-old woman, nicknamed “the shadow banker”, has been languishing in prison for two years, a legal twist could set her free. Behind this possible legal escape lie burning questions: how does the crypto system facilitate large-scale money laundering? And how far does digital impunity extend? Ekaterina Djanova is not an ordinary cybercriminal. Her network, named Darkbank, operated like a crime start-up. On the Darknet, the platform offered turnkey services: converting cryptos into anonymous cash, fragmenting transactions, and erasing blockchain traces. A macabre innovation, modeled on the standards of legal fintech, but dedicated to European drug traffickers. Investigators identified 68 collection points in France, mainly in Île-de-France. These physical hubs, often storefront businesses, served to materialize virtual money. For €3.2 million laundered, Darkbank charged fees of 15 to 30% – a business model as lucrative as it was risky. “It’s the Uberization of laundering,” jokes a prosecutor speaking anonymously. Yet, despite the weight of evidence, the judicial case wobbles. Djanova’s defense exploits a procedural loophole: the absence of formalization of a specific investigative act. A technical detail but enough for the Court of Cassation to review her release. The French judiciary, used to traditional cases, seems overwhelmed by the fluidity of crypto crimes. If Ekaterina Djanova regains her freedom, it will not be due to presumed innocence but a meticulous legal battle. Her lawyers obtained the referral of her request for release to the Paris investigation chamber, citing procedural irregularities. A bold strategy that reveals the limits of criminal law facing the technicality of digital crimes. The consequences could be heavy. Djanova, described as a crime influencer by Interpol, has an international contact book. Her release might paralyze the investigation, already weakened by encrypted communications and blockchain opacity. “She knows the algorithms better than our IT experts,” admits an investigator. Worse, such a scenario would set a precedent. Criminal organizations could exploit this loophole to dodge prosecution. The message would be clear: with enough resources and crypto expertise, even the most sophisticated networks can play with system weaknesses. The Djanova case illustrates the wide gap between technological innovation and legal framework. Cryptos, designed to evade controls, remain an ideal playground for organized crime. Meanwhile, authorities navigate blindly, balancing legislative adaptations and a technical race against time. If Ekaterina Djanova gets out of prison, it won’t be a victory for justice but a temporary admission of powerlessness. Her story mostly reminds us of an obvious truth: in the shadow of bitcoin , an invisible war is being waged. A war where every regulatory advance is countered by a new concealment protocol. And as long as this fragile balance exists, Darkbanks will continue to thrive.

The Federal Reserve Board on Thursday announced the withdrawal of guidance for banks related to their crypto asset and stablecoin activities, with changes to its expectations for these engagements. According to a statement, the move aims to ensure its supervisory approach remains aligned with evolving risks and to support innovation within the banking system further. As part of this shift, the Board is rescinding its 2022 supervisory letter. The directive had required state member banks to provide advance notification of any planned or ongoing crypto asset activities. Under the new rules, banks will no longer be expected to submit such communications. The Fed is also revoking a similar order from 2023 regarding the non-objection process for state member banks engaging in stablecoin activities. This eliminates the requirement for financial institutions to obtain prior approval before participating in such activities. Oversight will now fall under standard regulatory supervision, with no need for pre-clearance Additionally, the Federal Reserve, together with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), is withdrawing from two joint statements issued in 2023 by federal bank regulatory agencies. These communications had outlined the regulators’ views on the risks associated with crypto-asset exposures and provided preliminary guidance for banks operating in those markets. Following the adjustments, the Fed will now work with the relevant agencies to evaluate whether additional or updated guidance is needed to support innovation on crypto-related activities. This strategy reversal comes just weeks after the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) made a similar move. The federal banking regulator also rolled back restrictions that had limited the involvement of financial institutions with crypto assets. Before these policies were introduced, some industry figures had claimed that they and their businesses were denied traditional banking services solely because of their association with the digital asset industry. These allegations formed the basis of what came to be known as “Operation Chokepoint 2.0.” Thursday’s decision is the latest in a series of favorable outcomes for the crypto industry under the Trump administration. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it would no longer pursue criminal charges against crypto exchanges, developers, or users involved in regulatory violations. That development followed the disbanding of the National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team (NCET), a specialized DOJ unit that had previously handled crypto-related criminal cases. In February, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reduced the size of its department responsible for crypto prosecution. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) also downsized its digital asset enforcement teams in January, leaving just two groups to handle relevant cases.

Former Celsius Network CEO Alex Mashinsky is scheduled for sentencing on May 8, in New York, where he could face up to 20 years behind bars. This comes after he pleaded guilty late last year to two criminal charges related to commodities fraud and manipulating the price of Celsius’s own crypto token, CEL. Mashinsky admitted his guilt back in December 2024, more than a year after federal prosecutors initially hit him with multiple charges. His sentencing date was pushed back a month from April 8th after his legal team requested more time to present evidence. Related: Celsius Founder Pleads Guilty: Faces Fraud Sentencing in 2025 Celsius, once a leading crypto lending platform, collapsed in 2022. The crash followed the implosion of Terra, a major decentralized finance project that caused ripple effects across the industry. Before its bankruptcy, Celsius reportedly held $13 billion in customer deposits. U.S. authorities, including the Department of Justice, SEC, and FTC, pursued Mashinsky aggressively. They accused him of lying to investors about Celsius’s financial health and artificially pumping up the CEL token’s value for personal and company gain. During court proceedings, Mashinsky’s lawyers argued he wasn’t acting maliciously but rather relying heavily on advice from internal experts. However, prosecutors claimed he knowingly misled customers and manipulated token prices for personal and corporate gain. While his plea deal reduced the number of charges, the remaining ones still carry heavy potential sentences. No sentencing recommendation has been released publicly yet. Related: Celsius Creditors Recover 60% After $127M Bitcoin, USD Second Payout Mashinsky is one of several high-profile crypto executives charged or sentenced following the 2022 crypto market collapse. FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) received a 25-year sentence in 2024 for fraud offenses. Meanwhile, Terraform Labs co-founder Do Kwon was extradited to the United States and is scheduled for trial in January 2026. These high-profile cases signal a clear focus by U.S. regulators on holding crypto leaders accountable for investor harm. Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.

Eugene William Austin Jr., also known as “Hugh Austin,” was sentenced to 18 years in prison for leading a multi-year scheme that defrauded more than two dozen victims out of $12 million. His son, Brandon Austin, was previously sentenced to four years in connection with the fraud, according to the Justice department. According to U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, Austin’s operation targeted entrepreneurs and investors by offering fake cryptocurrency deals, short-term investment opportunities, and phony brokerage services. He also promised funding from supposed wealthy backers, none of which materialized. Victims were misled into believing their money was being invested, but the funds were used for personal expenses including luxury hotels, flights, and restaurants. A federal jury convicted Austin in September 2024 on charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and transporting stolen property across state lines. U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel handed down the sentences. Austin, 62, of Port Jefferson, New York, was also ordered to serve three years of supervised release, forfeit more than $6 million, and pay over $12.6 million in restitution. “This Office will continue to pursue those who exploit trust and use cryptocurrency as a cover for fraud,” Clayton said, crediting Homeland Security Investigations and the Complex Frauds and Cybercrime Unit for their work. The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Olga Zverovich, Matthew Weinberg, and Andrew Chan.

OpenAI: Willing to acquire Google Chrome if given the chance In the antitrust lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice against Google, Nick Turley, head of ChatGPT product at OpenAI, said that if the court requires Google to sell the Chrome browser, OpenAI is interested in acquiring it. The Department of Justice accused Google of maintaining a monopoly in the search market through the default search protocol and the Chrome browser, and suggested divesting Chrome as a potential remedy. Nick Turley pointed out that if ChatGPT can be integrated with Chrome, it will help improve the user experience and expand the product's influence. Currently, OpenAI is challenging Google's search dominance through products such as ChatGPT Search. (Fortune)